ArticleBMC medical education2013
Details acquired from medical history and patients' experience of empathy--two sides of the same coin.
Article in BMC medical education, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Relationships between self-efficacy beliefs and personal factors in final-year medical students.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Differences in history-taking skills between male and female chiropractic student interns.The Journal of chiropractic education · 2023Article
- The Association of "First 1000 Days of Life" Training Program on Communication Skill and Empathy of Undergraduate Medical Students: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of advances in medical education & professionalism · 2023Article
- Evaluating the History-Taking Process of Sexual Reproductive Health Problems in Tanzania: Lessons from a Study of Health Students and Practitioners.East African journal of health and science · 2023Article
- Identifying Patients with Familial Chylomicronemia Syndrome Using FCS Score-Based Data Mining Methods.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Mucus fishing syndrome.BMJ case reports · 2022Article
- The Computer Will See You Now: Overcoming Barriers to Adoption of Computer-Assisted History Taking (CAHT) in Primary Care.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Article
- Discrepancy in reports of COVID-19 onset of symptoms: are faulty data being collected?Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases · 2020Observational
- Effect of Patient-Physician Relationship on Withholding Information Behavior: Analysis of Health Information National Trends Survey (2011-2018) Data.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Verbal and non-verbal communication skills including empathy during history taking of undergraduate medical students.BMC medical education · 2018Article
- Translating medical documents improves students' communication skills in simulated physician-patient encounters.BMC medical education · 2016Article
- Ordering patterns for laboratory and radiology tests by students from different undergraduate medical curricula.BMC medical education · 2013Article
- Perceptions of the first graduates of the reformed medical curriculum of the College of Medicine at Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University.Journal of family & community medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHistory taking and empathetic communication are two important aspects in successful physician-patient interaction. Gathering important information from the patient's medical history is needed for effective clinical decision making while empathy is relevant for patient satisfaction. We wanted to investigate whether medical students near graduation are able to combine both skills as required in daily medical practice.
methodsThirty near graduates from Hamburg Medical School participated in an assessment for clinical competences including a consultation hour with five standardized patients. Each patient interview was videotaped and standardized patients rated participants with the CARE questionnaire for consultation and relational empathy. All videotaped interviews were rated with a checklist based on the number of important medical aspects for each case. Data were analysed with the linear mixed model to correct for random effects. Regression analysis was performed to look for correlations between the number of questions asked by a participant and their respective empathy rating.
resultsOf the 123 aspects that could have been gathered in total, students only requested 56.4% (95% CI 53.5-59.3). While no difference between male and female participants was found, a significant difference (p<.001) was observed between the two parts of the checklist with 61.1% (95% CI 57.9-64.3) of aspects asked for in part 1 (patient's symptoms) versus 52.0 (95 47.4-56.7) in part 2 (further history). All female standardized patients combined rated female participants (mean score 14.2, 95% CI 12.3-16.3) to be significantly (p<.01) more empathetic than male participants (mean score 19.2, 95% CI 16.3-22.6). Regression analysis revealed no correlation between the number of medical aspects gathered by a participant and his or her respective empathy score given by the standardized patient in the CARE questionnaire.
conclusionGathering sufficient medical data from a patient's history and empathetic communication are two completely separate sides of the coin of history taking. While both skills have to be acquired during medical school training with particular focus on their respective learning objectives, medical students need to be provided with additional learning and feedback opportunities where they can be observed exercising both skills combined as required in physicians' daily practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.